About your Search

20110701
20110731
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21
patterns that are not real. my favorite example that i use in the book is richard feynman and jon nash. richard feynman friend the nobel prize in physics for his work in quantum mechanics, specifically quantum electrodynamics of how the subatomic particles interact with each other. and he invented as a bird diagrams. these diagrams of how the subatomic particles interact with each other. they collide and interact and our. these are called feynman diagrams. he sketches the them out and adds mathematical equations to them. so powerful these diagrams they are still used today i physicist to explain the complex interactions of subatomic articles. so popular with diagrams that he had diagrams drawn on the side of his 1976 dodge cargo van which he drove around pasadena california where i'm from. in fact simon lived in alta made aware that. story goes when he was driving on lake boulevard where the rose parade is there and someone stuck stopped him stuck a metal light and rolled up the win and said how come you have feynman diagrams on your band? he said because i am feynman. that would be a
morning of july 23, 2009. which is right in the midst of the governors race. jon corzine is running for reelection against chris christie who had resigned in early january of that year, or maybe it was early december of that year. and he announced in early february, we all knew when he resigned that he was going to run for governor. so, there are a lot of people who think that the timing of the culmination of this to a three-year sting had a political taint to it, or political motive behind it. i know we're not going to answer that question definitively, but what -- one of the arguments onn the other side for whether this was politically motivated? >> the arguments against it would be, one of the arguments against it would be that the head of special prosecutions was a man by the name of jimmy who, in the u.s. attorney's office, if anything like that were going on on his watch, he would probably arrest himself. that's how ethical he views these things. and effect it affected the case because he actually was come he recuse himself a week before the arrest came down because he got a j
and and hoping jon stewart we'll say anything mean about your will like you. conservatives don't care about what people around them think that is why liberals still believe in god. >> >> would buy sign young conservatives with college? >> don't go to law school. >> he would be throwing your wife oil that the liberals go to law school. unless he will be a scumbag trial lawyer you will not make that much money you'll be working weekend for the rest of your lives and there i say did you know, you'd be doing this? and is said job that you did not know existed. i know what it is. the person who designs food for tv commercials so it looks attractive come up on the play, the lighting. there are a lot of jobs out there. young conservative should go into the media to become public school teachers and the pay is fantastic by the way. [laughter] college professors and republicans could teach me a few tricks if you're on a college campus, you are apparently not going with the flow. and that is very first-aid the bathetic this locking up to their professors. teacher another example of homophobia in hamlin.
listening to every it exhortation hoping jon stewart we'll say anything mean about your life to the conservatives don't care what people think that is why i think the liberals do not believe in god because they are assessed with people around them think. >> what advice you have a for college campuses? >> do not go to loss gore. [laughter] fine you would be throwing your life away. unless you will be a scumbag trial lawyer like john edwards you will not work-- to make that much money but working for the rest of your life on the weekend i met somebody with the strangest jobber are sid did you know, you would be doing this in a college? of course, she laughed. i no. the person who designs food for tv commercials so it looks attractive the lighting and how you put on the plate. there are a lot of jobs out there and i think john conservative should go into the media, hollywood, public-sch ool teachers, the pay is fantastic by the way. [laughter] college professors line college republicans could teach me a few tricks if you're an open republican apparently you are not going with t
i frankly don't trust what watchers wrote come i cannot rely on that. who killed the jon lingo? somebody. maybe yibin john lingo himself little mystery in history is okay. >> on the subject of josephine i was intrigued by referring to wider bad as her husband but there is no impression that there was never a legal marriage. can you speak to that? >> guest: certainly. of lot of marriages on the frontier were common-law where there was no legal ceremony and frankly all of the power they with the man rather than the woman when they got tired of it, it was dissolved there was no legal basis. wyatt earp i believe was married wants in his youth and in between him and josephine there were two common-law wives. i use the term has spent it as the term of the frontier of, but you are correct i don't believe there was a legal union. >> you look familiar. [laughter] do you have a favorite movie about the than five? can you comment on the strengths and weakness -- weaknesses of the various movies? >> guest: my favorite o.k. corral film is the "star trek" episode. [laughter] i still love tha
and our museum. if you choose to become a member tonight, we will give you a copy of the book. jon meacham leads tonight's discussion, a pulitzer rise-winning author and commentator on politics, history and religions based in america. he?g is editor at large at wnetg public media and contribute torg the pbs news magazine "need to know." since we're recording tonight's presentation on booktv, have to ask your questions from the microphone right here. we won't be able to accept questions from your seat. but now join me, please, in welcoming our guest. [applause] >> oh, i loved it. thank you. thank you all very much. thank you to the tenement museum which has in a relatively short time become such an importanty part of the fabric of the city. you hear a lot about it even in the american south where i come from, and they actually are struck that not everything is a tenement. [laughter] but, and so they can come and look and see what it used to be like. but thank you for your hospitality. and congratulations to louisa who has written, i think, a wonderful book, a deeply researched and engagin
this evening, will give you a complimentary copy of "conscience." tonight's conversation is a tie jon meacham, executive editor and vice president ran an vice president random house conifer editor of "newsweek" and pulitzer prize-winning author and commentator on politics history of religious faith in?gg america.?g?g?g7g?g he is editor at large at wnet?gg public media and contributor to the pbs television newsmagazine. after their conversation, love the opportunity to ask questions presents a recording to its presentation, you have to ask questions from the microphone hereççççç [applause] >> thank you love very much.x thank you to the tenement museum who has been a relativelyyy short-lived become an important part of the fabric of the city. you hear a lot even in the american south, where i come from. a deeply researched and engage in a written account of her own family, which is not always an easy thing to do. and they want to start with some specific questions and then we're going to read a couple of things. then they will be a little socialist jeopardy to keep her going. but w
gone up. there is the noble savage myth starting with jon jacques cousteau and then of course margaret mead and looks like tarzan was somehow tried to persuade us that people who are uncivilized or more noble than people who live in modern day. that is plain wrong because when you prepare honesty levels and trust levels among aboriginal tribes, and among ourselves, the aboriginal tribes in fact don't come off so well. number three, culture. we as human beings, we like drama. we don't like stasis. we get bored. even children know this. fairytales. the good ones are not warring. they tend to have some bad characters. they have tension in them. follow the yellow brick road and you get a really scary greenwich at the end and flying monkeys. who now funny enough are in congress, but that is a whole different story. i was in florence italy two weeks ago in a tape my kids to see michael angelo's david and you know before michelangelo and before the renaissance i have to tell you i think that painting was pretty boring. you look at the madonna sculpted prior to the renaissance, and they are so
on booktv jon miller recounts president theodore roosevelt involvement in the reimagining of football which save the sport from being banned and ultimately to the creation of the national collegiate athletic association, the ncaa. this is about 40 minutes. >> if you're wondering what kind of knucklehead puts on a book about football at the start of baseball season, the answer is the same 10 of knucklehead who is a lifelong fan of the detroit lions here the good thing about being a lifelong fan of the detroit lions is that the experience teaches important life lessons. for example, how to deal with severe and ongoing disappointment. i've learned that humor helps. who knows the difference between the detroit lions and a dollar bill? it turns out that from a dollar bill you can still get four quarters. [laughter] thank you. i'll be performing all week at aei. let's talk about football and theodore roosevelt. i'd like to start with a statistic. in 1905, 18 people died playing football. in 1905, 18 people died playing football. so we hear a lot today about the problem concussions and head
are warranted can we start proceedings to modify or repeal the really guide. as jon mentioned, through this process, we've repeal 37 rules and guides. we have it repealed an upgrade since 2004. i think we did that get the most serious cases first. but we have undertaken modifications with respect to other since the time. when i post reviews and plays in one proceeding considering amendment to the labeling requirements for the alternative fuels and alternative fuel vehicles and here we are assessing how to eliminate the need for firm redundant labels demanded by different agencies. in another instance, accelerated to review of our mechanism for mandating notification and reporting of mergers and we intend to initiate reviews of the leather marble staircase son. comments provided in this process overwhelmingly show business support for an uncovered the mechanism we fuse the moving guys themselves. at least in particular stand out as a means to reduce business burdens by what we regard to be the line that separates appropria
's paired with jon stewart on the daily show, done charlie road, he's done numerous talk shows, and he's incredibly adept at not answering questions. [laughter] but i'm going to try. >> i was waiting for a compliment. [laughter] >> that was a compliment. >> okay. >> that was a compliment. [laughter] you, you -- in the beginning of your remarks you talked about public diplomacy and what challenge it was for both our countries. you were quoted recently as talking about remarks you made at pakistan's national defense university where you asked your audience, um, who pakistan's enemy was. you asked them how many of them thought that al-qaeda was the enemy, and not too many raised their hands. you asked them whether india was the enemy, and not too many raised their hands, a few more. and then you asked them if the united states was the enemy, and that's where you got most of the hands raised. that is something in this country just find in explicable, just can't understand. they say, my gosh, we've given pakistan $20 billion over the past eight or nine years and, granted, that's kind of a p
was always crazy. but some of those like tim pawlenty, if you go watch back when he was on jon stewart the first time i ever saw him, he struck me a as a nice fella. and purposely reasonable guy. and now he is saying a lot of crazy stuff. the question is, whether they'll to come back from the? what seems to be hav happening s they seem to be setting up mitch daniels to be the guy. he will strike everybody as sane. he will be a very tough opponent. and as far as the demographics, well, i think minorities and young people are going to be the hardest people to turn out after the disappointment of, between 2008 and 2012. i think a lot of people, george bush was so horrible, and again the idea of electing an african-american named barack hussein obama was so amazing that i think we can all forgive ourselves whatever illusions we had up through election day. i forgive myself. but the fact is, is that he, the greatest criticism i would make of obama is, because again, i wrote a whole book called the system versus barack obama. we had to fight to change the system. just a quick aside because t
you want to hit on. and then we'll open it up from more conversation. >> thanks, jon. first, i just want to thank martin and tom for the very gracious comment and i think quite helpful insights about the dodd-frank act. so i might just take 2 minutes or 3 minutes to highlight some issues and then we can open it up on -- or jon can lead us through conversation. on martin's comment, i think i agree with an aspect of martin's comments on resolution authority. if there is -- if there is an error in the dodd-frank act on the mix of crisis tools which undoubtedly it will be. it's in the direction martin indicated, in the direction of being overly constraining of treasury and the fed of the crisis. i don't think the error -- often in the public debate people suggest errors is the other direction. i think martin is correct. if we erred in limiting authorities, not in being -- not to insufficiently tough about them. on tom's comments, i do think there's always this debate in the regulatory structure. it's impossible to escape between rules and discretion. it's a debate that's been around for
and morality are essential to the good of massachusetts. this last until 1833. i think jon and i are arguing the flipside of, arguing the opposite side of the coin but i don't think we are in disagreement at all. >> we have time for one more question. in the back in the red sweater. >> i'm curious to your answer, we have members of the supreme court today that feel they should rule their decisions on what the people were thinking at the time of the constitution being written. now, where'd you come down on something like that? [applause] >> you give me a pointer to the supreme court, i'd be happy to set them straight. [laughter] look, the question of original intent is one that historians by and large reject. i'm also a lawyer so i don't rejected quite as quickly as historians do. what the supreme court has said again and again, this is interesting, important and interesting, the one provision of the constitution that should be bounded by its history is the first amendment. you see that over and over again in the supreme court cases. so even the members of the court to reject the notion of or
, waste of government money. well, there is a reason that jon mccain and barack obama both voted for the bailout. it is not because of wall street. it is because the main street in the biggest car dealership in the country that stopped financing cars is about to get to the point where you could go to sears and buy any kind of appliance on credit. the financial system had to be saved. we don't want to go there again. so most people did know this. they said we hate these bailouts. the democrats passed a financial reform bill, which gave the government power over some transactions it did not have to stop excessive leverage, that is to stop companies from making too many investments they didn't have the cash to cover. traditional banks would own $10 for every dollar in cash. when bear stearns failed in his 30 to one. lehman brothers about four to one. that's what's really in a financial reform bill. and by the way, if somehow they get around this and fail again, nomar bailouts. here's an orderly procedure for bankruptcy in the management and shareholders have to beat the loss. in oth
? >> i don't know how to answer that, jon. i was laughing over at you. i was looking at amy friend who joined us and amy and i had lots of conversations that were about that very topic. and amy was right more than i was about the answers to that question. but they were usually pretty pessimistic answers. so what do you do? i mean, it's like any other constraint. i mean, we live in the world we live in. and not in a different world. and the political system is no different than that. and it's much better to design good policy that works for the world you live in than to design policy that works for a world you don't live in. so i think not just being pig headed is the answer i would give. >> well, there is a moment in history when it's a little hard to be optimistic about policy. everything is so polarized. my colleagues at brookings that congress is more polarized. that is to say the most liberal republican is more conservative than the most conservative democrat so working out agreements in that environment is pretty difficult. to take a slightly more positive turn, i think we do pass
fired from non-policy on jon boehner. they are shorthand for the incredibly narrow range of choice that we actually have in political -- and elected officials. >> to house financial services subcommittee funny joint hearing on mortgage service in a foreclosure mitigation is. they also discussed the role of federal regulators in the ongoing mortgage service the negotiations. among those test thing at the hearing was david stevens, president of the mortgage and the immediate former commissioner of the federal housing administration. this is about three hours in 35 minutes. >> this hearing will come to order. and that you think my ranking member, mrs. moloney as well as oversight investigations chairman, if new cabal or who will be here in a few minutes and is ranking member, mr. pappalardo for organizing this joint hearing. many members have a great interest in having a hearing on the topic of march at servicing. it's light of today's hearing will provide a forum for members to cover multitude of subjects involving servicing. we were all shot at the news was followed allegations that
.gton journal" host: we are back live jon hilsenrath of "the wall street journal." taking a look at this week's economic rebound, that is what the- taking a look at weak economic rebound. here is the headline from "the wall street journal" this morning, "companies bracing for the fall." guest: american companies are operating in a very >> they have already been disappointed by what happened in the first half of the year. i've been talking to companies in the last few days. i'm winnebago industries, a rv company, that was expected to have good spending in the first half. this didn't happen. they are back to deciding whether or not to cut back on that. what they don't want right now is uncertainty. that's what we are getting. >> host: you see the ups chief in todays "financial times" the small and mid sized companies that would be using his are pulling back. they are not sure. >> guest: right. this is largely, i think, because of the uncertainty they face. default, downgrade, you never now how investors are going to react. ironically what we have seen, investors have been calm. but the worry i
in all kinds of forms. he has paired with jon stewart on "the daily show." he has been on charlie rose and has is done inoperable talk shows and is incredibly adept at not answering questions that i want him to answer. [laughter] so i'm going to try. i'm going to try. >> i was waiting for a complement. [laughter] >> that was a compliment. that was a complement. in the beginning of your remarks he talked about public diplomacy and what a challenge it was for both our countries. you were quoted recently as talking about remarks he made at pakistan's national defense university where you asked your audience who pakistan's enemy was. u.s. them how many of them thought that al qaeda was the enemy and not too many raised their hands. u.s. them whether india was the enemy and not too many raised their hands in the new estimate the united states with the enemy and there is where you got most of the hands raised. i think that is something that people in this country just find inexplicable, just can't understand. they say my gosh we have given pakistan $20 billion over the past eight or nine yea
on a diet. i'm going to add calories to my excluded food intake." unquote. that was jon stewart. he hit the nail on the head. for sure it's easy to make fun but what the president is trying to do with tax expenditures is no laughing matter. liberals talk about tax expenditures as though they were just getting rid of wasteful spending. first, as a legal matter, tax expenditures are not spending. outlays are checks cut from the treasury department are defined as spending under the congressional budget act. that's what spending is. yet, most tax expenditures only lose revenue and do not include an outlay portion. tax expenditures that only lose revenue contain no spending as defined by the congressional budget act and is scored by the official scorekeepers for congress. the joint committee on taxation and the congressional budget office. and second, as a policy matter twhe comes to tax -- when it comes to tax expenditures, one person's loophole is another person's opportunity to save for college and retirement, finance a home and ties to your -- taoeugts -- tithes to your church. reducing
to my excluded food intake." unquote. that was jon stewart. he hit the nail on the head. for sure it's easy to make fun but what the president is trying to do with tax expenditures is no laughing matter. liberals talk about tax expenditures as though they were just getting rid of wasteful spending. first, as a legal matter, tax expenditures are not spending. outlays are checks cut from the treasury department are defined as spending under the congressional budget act. that's what spending is. yet, most tax expenditures only lose revenue and do not include an outlay portion. tax expenditures that only lose revenue contain no spending as defined by the congressional budget act and is scored by the official scorekeepers for congress. the joint committee on taxation and the congressional budget office. and second, as a policy matter twhe comes to tax -- when it comes to tax expenditures, one person's loophole is another person's opportunity to save for college and retirement, finance a home and ties to your -- taoeugts -- tithes to your church. reducing tax expenditures is a tax increase
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)